DOCSLIB.ORG

Prof. David D. Walter Academic Experience

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Prof. David D. Walter Academic Experience PROF. DAVID D. WALTER 11200 SW 8th Street RDB 2055 Miami, FL 33199 Office: (305) 348-8339 E-Mail: walterd @fiu.edu ACADEMIC EXPERIENCE Florida International University College of Law, Miami, Florida Co-Director, Legal Skills & Values Program, January 2009-Present Professor, Legal Skills & Values Program, 2013-Present Interim Director, Legal Skills & Values Program, May 2005-May 2007 Associate Professor, Legal Skills & Values Program, 2002-2013 Courses: – Legal Skills & Values I, 2002-2007 – Taught legal analysis, synthesis, research, objective writing, client interviewing, client counseling, and professionalism (30-40 first-year students – Fall Semesters) – Legal Skills & Values II, 2003-2006 – Taught persuasive pretrial and appellate writing and oral advocacy and professionalism (30-40 first-year students – Spring Semesters) – Legal Skills & Values III, 2005-Present – Teach cover letter/resume writing, contract drafting, correspondence drafting, negotiations, pleading drafting, persuasive pretrial memo writing, and professionalism (16-20 second- and third-year students – Fall and Spring Semesters) – Appellate Procedure I, Fall 2004-Present – Teach advanced persuasive appellate brief writing skills, appellate oral advocacy skills, and relevant appellate rules and procedure topics in conjunction with the FIU Board of Advocates Intramural Appellate Advocacy Competition (35-45 second-year day and third-year evening students – Fall Semesters) – Appellate Procedure II – Designed course focusing on appellate practice and procedure in the Florida District Court of Appeals and Eleventh Circuit and litigation drafting skills (course currently taught by Prof. Klion) – Orientation, 2002-2008 – Co-taught legal analysis, exam-taking skills, and professionalism to entering class (day and evening first-year students during orientation – Fall Semesters) – Independent Study, Summer 2004, Fall 2006, Spring 2009, Summer/Fall 2011 – Supervised independent study of student clerking for federal district court judge (Summer 2004) – Supervised independent study for three students completing LSV III (Fall 2006) – Supervised independent study for student studying PETA-related feminism issues (2009) – Supervised independent studies for two students working to improve research, analysis, and writing skills (Summer/Fall 2011) – Law Review Comment Faculty Advisor, 2003-2005, 2007-2008 – Advised students writing law review comments and provided editorial assistance – Rosemary Barkett Appellate Inn of Court Faculty Advisor, 2009-2016; Civil Externship Supervisor, 2011-2013 – Worked with Third District Judge Vance Salter & Prof. Kerri Stone to establish Appellate Inn of Court (2009-11); work with Prof. Stone to select and monitor new FIU student members of Inn and their appellate case work (2010-2016); work with Prof. Phyllis Kotey to supervise Inn of Court students’ completion of Community Service and Advanced Civil Externship requirements and Inn of Court case work (2010-2013) DAVID D. WALTER – PAGE TWO Administrative Duties; Committee Service; Community Service; Honors: – Co-Director, Legal Skills & Values Program, January 2009-Present – Direct and develop upper-level portion of sophisticated, three-semester Legal Skills Program; create and revise syllabus and substantive content of Legal Skills & Values III course taught to second- and third-year students (50 students/Fall Semester; 110 students /Spring Semesters); hire, train, and supervise four adjunct professors teaching Fall Semester LSV III course and eight adjunct professors teaching Spring Semester LSV III course; prepare, revise, and supplement 200+ pages of class notes used by all LSV III adjuncts; evaluate grades for all sections for compliance with FIU COL curve; create and develop elective Legal Skills & Values IV – Interim Director, Legal Skills & Values Program, May 2005-May 2007 – Directed, supervised, and developed sophisticated Legal Skills Program involving three Legal Skills & Values courses, five full-time professors, and over 200 first- and second- year day and evening students; revised and developed substantive content of three Legal Skills & Values courses; co-ordinated search and hiring of three professors and three program assistants – Legal Skills & Values Faculty Search Committee, Member, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2008 – Reviewed applications, selected final pool of candidates, and interviewed candidates during candidate visits to Florida International University – FIU Faculty Senate, College of Law Senator, 2008-2014 – Attended bi-monthly meetings; served on Senate Nominating Committee, 2009-2014 – Admissions Committee, Chair, 2004-2005, 2008-2012; Member, 2002-2004 – Evaluated admissions files, selected students for entering class, and attended admissions presentations and functions – Lecturer Review Committee, Member, 2012-Present – 2012-2013, Reviewed Lecturer Application; observed Lecturer’s class sessions; reviewed student evaluations; reviewed graded/critiqued student work; drafted significant portion of LRC Report, Teaching Section – 2013-2014, Reviewed seven Lecturer Applications; observed multiple class sessions; reviewed student evaluations; reviewed graded/critiqued student work; drafted significant portions of two LRC Reports, Teaching Sections – 2014-15, Review Lecturer Application; participated in several discussions regarding Lecturer’s Application – 2015-2016, Participated in several discussions regarding amendments to By-Laws regarding Lecturer Review Process – Board of Advocates / Moot Court Committee, Chair, 2003-2015; Moot Court Team & Negotiations/ADR Team Advisor, 2015-Present – Chaired committee to create and develop comprehensive Moot Court Program encompassing internal and external appellate advocacy, negotiation, mediation, client counseling, and trial practice competitions and to create and develop Fall Intramural Appellate Advocacy Competition – as Committee Chair, took primary role in creating Fall Intramural Appellate Advocacy Competition Plan, Rules, and Problem, scoring the 35-page Competition appellate briefs, and obtaining the necessary rooms, judges, trophies, and certificates – as Committee Chair, took primary role in drafting course proposals and descriptions for six new Board of Advocates courses – as Committee Chair/Co-Chair, 2003-2015, and as Moot Court Team & Negotiation/ADR Team Advisor, 2015-Present, continue to oversee the intramural negotiation and appellate advocacy competitions, the selection of external competitions, and the selection of new negotiation and appellate advocacy team members for external competitions DAVID D. WALTER – PAGE THREE – Board of Advocates, Faculty Advisor, 2003-Present – Advised student members of the Board of Advocates regarding the election of the Board’s initial officers and committees, the creation of the Board’s constitution, the development of the intramural appellate advocacy competition and additional intramural competitions, the development of the Board’s web page and other public relation methods, and the selection of new Board members by faculty/student committees – Advised over 100 teams in over 70 regional/national/international moot court, negotiation, and mediation competitions, including: 23 Finalist, 23 Semi-Finalist, 11 Quarterfinalist, and 5 Octofinalist Teams 4 Best Briefs, 5 Second-Place Briefs, 4Third-Place Brief, 1 Fourth-Place Brief 7 Best Orators, 5 Second-Place Orators, 3 Third-Place Orators, and 2 Fourth-Place Orators – Board of Advocates, Faculty Coach/Co-Coach, 2003-Present – Coached 79 teams in the following 55 regional, national, and international moot court, negotiation, and mediation competitions: – American Bar Association National Negotiations Competition 2015-16 National Finals, Semi-Finalist (Sixth Place), San Diego 2015-16 Regional Champions, Miami 2014-15 National Finals, Finalist (Second Place) & Semi-Finalist (Tenth Place), Houston 2014-15 Regional Champions, Runner-Up & Third Place, Macon, Georgia 2013-14 National Finals, Semi-Finalist (Fifth Place) & Twenty-Second Place, Chicago 2013-14 Regional Champions & Regional Runner-Up, Atlanta 2012-13 National Finals, Semi-Finalist (Seventh Place); Dallas 2012-13 Regional Champions, Miami 2011-12 National Finals Semi-Finalist (Tenth Place); New Orleans 2011-12 Regional Runner-Up & Fourth Place, Raleigh, North Carolina 2010 Regional Round Teams, St. Petersburg, Florida 2009-10 National Finals, Finalist (Fourth Place), Orlando 2009-10 Regional Champions, Tallahassee 2008-09 National Finals, Finalist (Third Place), Boston 2008-09 Regional Champions, Miami 2007-08 National Finals, Semi-Finalists (Fourteenth Place), Los Angeles 2007-08 Regional Champions – The International Negotiation Competition 2015 Fourth Place, Dublin, Ireland (of 24 teams worldwide) – The International Chamber of Commerce Mediation Competition 2015 Quarterfinals, Paris, France (top 8 of 66 teams worldwide; one of top three U.S. teams) – The LawMeets Transactional Drafting & Negotiation Competition 2014 Runner-Up Best Draft Contract, Houston 2014 Team, Athens, Georgia – The Monroe E. Price International Media Law Moot Court Competition 2016 International Final Rounds (Oxford University) 2016 Americas Regional Round, Quarterfinalist 2015 International Final Rounds (Oxford University), Semi-Finalist (Third-Place, of 38 teams worldwide) 2015 Americas Regional Round, Runner-Up Team 2014 International Final Rounds (Oxford University), Octofinalist; Eighth-Place Orator, Tenth-Place Orator 2014 Americas Regional Round, Quarterfinalist; Fourth-Place Orator 2013
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Importance of Trial Experience in the Training of Law Students
    Volume 58 Issue 2 Dickinson Law Review - Volume 58, 1953-1954 1-1-1954 The Importance of Trial Experience in the Training of Law Students Frank Smith Follow this and additional works at: https://ideas.dickinsonlaw.psu.edu/dlra Recommended Citation Frank Smith, The Importance of Trial Experience in the Training of Law Students, 58 DICK. L. REV. 131 (1954). Available at: https://ideas.dickinsonlaw.psu.edu/dlra/vol58/iss2/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Dickinson Law IDEAS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dickinson Law Review by an authorized editor of Dickinson Law IDEAS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DICKINSON LAW REVIEW THE IMPORTANCE OF TRIAL EXPERIENCE IN THE TRAINING OF LAW STUDENTS By FRANK SMITH* In the many years that I have been on the bench, I have on many occasions been called upon to sit as a judge in moot court arguments of students of the law schools of Philadelphia. In most instances I have been pleased with the evident preparation and the oral arguments of the students. The subject is usually one of interest and is calculated to display research and the ability and ingenuity of coun- sel. In most instances the students realize the point involved and know how to buttress their arguments with cases in point. The briefs they submit are generally good, well typed, and neat. So as far as moot court arguments are concerned, it is apparent that the instructors and professors of the law schools have done their work well.
    [Show full text]
  • Thematic Moot Court
    Thematic Moot Court: Brief Notes and Materials Part I (Units 1 to 3) Elias N. Stebek St. Mary’s University College, Faculty of Law Sponsored by Justice and Legal System Research Institute Addis Ababa, Ethiopia September 2009 JUSTICE AND LEGAL SYSTEM RESEARCH INSTITUTE Thematic Moot Court: Brief Notes and Materials Elias N. Stebek St. Mary’s University College, Faculty of Law General Introduction (pages 1-4) Part I (pp. 5-132) Part II (pp. 133- 253) ii Thematic Moot Court: Brief Notes and Materials (September 2009) Contents Page Contents ................................................................................................................... iii Preface ...................................................................................................................... vi General Introduction ................................................................................................ 1 Part I – Moot Court: Purposes, Preparation and Briefs Overview .................................................................................................................. 5 Unit 1- Learning and Competitive Aspects of Moot Court 1.1- Specific Learning Outcomes ................................................................................. 6 1.2- Unit Introduction .................................................................................................... 6 1.3- Tasks: Week 1 ........................................................................................................... 9 1.4- Readings: Week 1 Reading 1: Introductory
    [Show full text]
  • Memorial for the European Union
    Memorial on Behalf of the European Union (EU) INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE REQUEST FOR AN ADVISORY OPINION CONCERNING FRESHWATER RIGHTS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW IN RELATION TO THE POTENTIAL LEGAL PERSONALITY OF RIVERS AND THE CLIMATE CRISIS MEMORIAL FOR THE EUROPEAN UNION THE 1st WCEL INTERNATIONAL WATER JUSTICE MOOT COURT AT THE CONFERENCE OF JUDGES AND PROSECUTORS ON WATER JUSTICE DURING THE 8th WORLD WATER FORUM IN BRASÍLIA, BRAZIL MARCH 2018 AGENT FOR THE EUROPEAN UNION: MATIJA KAJIĆ, LL.M, UTRECHT UNIVERSITY ADVISOR: ANOESKA BUIJZE 1st WCEL International Water Justice Moot Court – 8th World Water Forum – Brasília The agents and organizations in this moot court are participating for educational purposes only and have no actual attorney client relationship. 1 Memorial on Behalf of the European Union (EU) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Anoeska Buijze, Assistant Professor of Administrative Law at Utrecht University, the Netherlands. Hendrik Schoukens, Post-Doc staff member at the University of Ghent, assisting with the courses ‘Moot Court Public International Law’ and ‘Diplomatic Law’. Work of researchers at the Utrecht Centre for Water, Oceans and Sustainability Law. Work of researchers at RENFORCE (the Utrecht Centre for Regulation and Enforcement in Europe). 1st WCEL International Water Justice Moot Court – 8th World Water Forum – Brasília The agents and organizations in this moot court are participating for educational purposes only and have no actual attorney client relationship. 2 Memorial on Behalf of the European Union (EU) I. TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 3 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES 4 II. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 7 III. PROBLEM PRESENTED 8 IV. IN CONTEXT: EUROPEAN UNION 10 V.
    [Show full text]
  • Memorial of the Applicant
    Canada-United States Law Journal Volume 37 Issue 1 Article 4 2012 Memorial of the Applicant James van Wyck Justin Dick Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cuslj Part of the International Law Commons Recommended Citation James van Wyck and Justin Dick, Memorial of the Applicant, 37 Can.-U.S. L.J. 45 (2012) Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cuslj/vol37/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Journals at Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Canada-United States Law Journal by an authorized administrator of Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. 2011-2012 NIAGARA INTERNATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION A DISPUTE ARISING UNDER THE STATUTE OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE FEBRUARY, 2012 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES (Applicant) V. THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA (Respondent) MEMORIAL OF THE APPLICANT James van Wyck & Justin Dick TABLE OF CONTENTS INDEX OF AUTHORITIES ............................... 47 STATEMENT OF FACTS .................................. 49 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION .................... ..... 52 QUESTIONS PRESENTED ............................... 53 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ....................... ...... 53 ARGUMENT ................................. ......... 53 I. CANADA'S INTERVENTION INTO TANGOON WAS NOT LAWFUL UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW .................. 53 A. Canada's actions violate fundamental principles of the United Nations, including the prohibition on the use of force and the preeminence of sov- 46 CANADA-UNITED STATES LA WJOURNAL [Vol. 37, No. 1] ereignty..............................................54 1. The prohibition on the use of force ..................... 54 2. The importance of state sovereignty .................... 54 B. The principle of collective self-defense does not justify Canada's un- lawful entry into Tangoon ......................
    [Show full text]
  • Another Season of Record-Breaking International Moot Court Achievements (SMU) Siyuan CHEN Singapore Management University, [email protected]
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Singapore Management University Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Research Collection School Of Law School of Law 11-2017 Another season of record-breaking international moot court achievements (SMU) Siyuan CHEN Singapore Management University, [email protected] Eunice CHUA Singapore Management University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research Part of the Education Law Commons, and the International and Comparative Education Commons Citation CHEN, Siyuan and CHUA, Eunice. Another season of record-breaking international moot court achievements (SMU). (2017). Singapore Law Gazette. Research Collection School Of Law. Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2495 This Magazine Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Research Collection School Of Law by an authorized administrator of Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University. For more information, please email [email protected]. SMU Classification: Restricted EVENTS November 2017 Another Season of Record-Breaking International Moot Court Achievements (SMU) by Chen Siyuan and Eunice Chua Another Season of Record-Breaking International Moot Court Achievements for Singapore Management University
    [Show full text]
  • JD Lorance & Thompson Negotiation
    EDUCATION University of Houston Law Center- J.D. 2004-2007 Ø Lorance & Thompson Negotiation Competition 2005, 2006 Ø John Black Moot Court Competition 2005 Ø Thomas Newhouse Mediation Competition- Semifinalist 2005 Texas A&M University- B.B.A 2000-2004 Ø Business Management major with English minor Ø Certification in International Business through study abroad experience in Mexico with focus on NAFTA strategies and maquiladora business model Ø State and nationally syndicated columnist for the student paper, student government senator, part-time professional lobbyist to state legislature EXPERIENCE Brothers Alvarado, P.C.- Associate 2013-Present Brothers, Sepulveda & Alvarado, P.C.- Associate 2010-2013 Ø First chair jury trial experience Ø Litigation and motion practice, both state and federal court Ø Defend wide variety of personal injury, business tort, DTPA suits Ø Manage average of 25 active cases simultaneously Ø Extensive deposition, mediation and summary judgment experience Ø Prevailed through Directed Verdict on defamation jury trial Ø Won recent dismissal on Petition for Writ of Mandamus to Court of Appeals Thompson Law Firm, L.P.- Clerk & Associate 2005-2010 Ø First chair jury trial experience Ø Primarily family law practice with experience in probate, estate planning, contracts, real estate, ERISA, debt protection Ø Routinely appeared for hearings, attended mediations, deposed witnesses Ø Managed appellate case from appeal through final disposition Ø Handled pro bono cases in addition to regular work load Ø Launched firm’s online
    [Show full text]
  • Brief for Appellant Second Annual Benton National Moot Court Competition Briefs, 17 J
    UIC Law Review Volume 17 Issue 3 Article 14 Summer 1984 Brief for Appellant Second Annual Benton National Moot Court Competition Briefs, 17 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1005 (1984) Diane K. Shaw Mark D. Haas David W. Holman Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview Part of the Legal Writing and Research Commons Recommended Citation Diane K. Shaw, Brief for Appellant Second Annual Benton National Moot Court Competition Briefs, 17 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1005 (1984) https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview/vol17/iss3/14 This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by UIC Law Open Access Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in UIC Law Review by an authorized administrator of UIC Law Open Access Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 1984] Computer User's Liability for Improper Disclosure NO. 83- IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MARSHALL OCTOBER TERM, 1983 WILLIAM DUFFY, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, - vs. - LINCOLN COUNTY STATE BANK CORPORATION, Appellee/Cross-Appellant. On Appeal From the Appellate Court of the State of Marshall BRIEF FOR APPELLANT Dianne K. Shaw Mark D. Haas David W. Holman ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT The South Texas College of Law Houston, Texas 77002 COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT September 26, 1983± The John Marshall Law Review [Vol. 17:989 QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. WHETHER LINCOLN COUNTY STATE BANK'S STORAGE OF LARGE VOLUMES OF PERSONAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION IN A COMPUTER SHOULD BE DECLARED AN ABNORMALLY DANGEROUS ACTIVITY. II. WHETHER LINCOLN COUNTY STATE BANK SHOULD BE LIABLE FOR NEGLIGENT DISCLOSURE OF WILLIAM DUFFY'S PERSONAL FINANCIAL RECORDS.
    [Show full text]
  • International Law Moot Court Competition*
    Moot Problem for 2013 ICCTC Recruitment Armis vs. Recho A Case concerning the evacuation of a foreigner during an outbreak of a malignant influenza1 1. Countries Armis and Recho are members of the United Nations. They are parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), and the Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties. 2. Armis does not border Recho and Megoose, but Recho borders Megoose. In March 2010, a malignant influenza was going around Megoose, but there were not enough vaccines for the entire population. The Government of Megoose issued an instruction to inhabitants living within a 30-kilometer radius from the area where the spread of influenza was the most serious to not move, in principle, in and out of the area. 3. The Government of Armis instructed all nationals of Armis living in Recho as well as in Megoose to evacuate each country at once by the use of chartered flights arranged by the Government. About 30 percent of the nationals of Armis living in Recho left to return to Armis. 2 4. In April 2010, the Government of Megoose revoked the restriction placed on movement, recognizing that the influenza epidemic was waning. 1 This case is adapted from the moot problem of International Law Moot Court Competition “Asia Cup 2012”and the copyright belongs to the organizer thereof. 2 Recho borders Megoose at a 50-kilometer distance from where the spread of influenza was the most serious.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Fundamentals of Appellate Advocacy in a Moot Court Siyuan CHEN Singapore Management University, [email protected]
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Singapore Management University Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Research Collection School Of Law School of Law 2012 Advanced Fundamentals of Appellate Advocacy in a Moot Court Siyuan CHEN Singapore Management University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research Part of the Legal Education Commons Citation CHEN, Siyuan. Advanced Fundamentals of Appellate Advocacy in a Moot Court. (2012). Singapore Law Review. 30, 45-62. Research Collection School Of Law. Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/1980 This Journal Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Research Collection School Of Law by an authorized administrator of Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University. For more information, please email [email protected]. Singapore Law Review (2012) 30 Sing.L.Rev. Published in Singapore Law Review, 2012, vol. 30, pp. 45-62. ADVANCED FUNDAMENTALS OF ORAL APPELLATE ADVOCACY IN A MOOT COURT CHEN SIYUAN* This article discusses some of the more advanced techniques and “tricks” in mooting and is meant primarily for students who are aiming to compete in moot court competitions for the first time. It builds upon the basic fundamentals that would have been taught in a Legal Writing course, and covers the four key components of a moot: the opening, the arguments, the answering of questions, and the conclusion/rebuttals.
    [Show full text]
  • Official Rules, Comments, and Forms 64Th Annual National Moot Court
    Sixty-Fourth Annual NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION RULES, COMMENTS, AND FORMS 2013-2014 Table of Contents Background .................................................................................................................... 1 Rule 1 – Competition’s Mission..................................................................................... 2 Rule 2 – Teams .............................................................................................................. 2 Rule 3 – Briefs................................................................................................................ 3 Rule 4 – Service of Briefs............................................................................................... 5 Rule 5 – Clerks............................................................................................................... 6 Rule 6 – Oral Arguments............................................................................................... 8 Rule 7 – Regional Rounds............................................................................................ 12 Rule 8 – National Final Rounds.................................................................................. 13 Rule 9 – No Assistance ................................................................................................ 14 Rule 10 – No Scouting ................................................................................................. 15 Rule 11 – Penalties .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Schaber HS Moot Court Facts 2020-21
    Gordon D. Schaber Competition 2020-21 Moot Court Hannah Cohn v. Placerado Unified School Distirct, et al FACT Situation FACT PATTERN Gordon D. Schaber • 2020-21 Moot Court 1 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 2 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT 3 --oOo-- 4 ) Case No.: 2020-501 5 HANNAH COHN, a Minor, by and ) ) 6 through her parents, Robert and ) FACTS ) 7 Andrea Cohn, ) ) 8 Plaintiff & Appellant, ) ) 9 vs. ) ) 10 ) PLACERADO UNIFIED SCHOOL ) 11 ) DISTRICT & COUNTY OF ) 12 PLACERADO, ) ) 13 ) Defendants & Appellees. ) 14 15 The parties agree the following facts are undisputed: 16 During the 2019-20 school year, fifteen-year-old Hannah Cohn 17 was a sophomore at Placerado High School in Auburnville, California. 18 At the start of the school year, Hannah was elected sophomore class 19 representative to the school’s student government. 20 In March 2020, Hannah was on a school soccer trip in Arizona 21 when the team had to rush home because of the Covid-19 epidemic. A 22 few days after she returned home, Hannah started having symptoms 23 consistent with Covid-19, including a fever, dry cough and difficulty 24 breathing. 25 1 - FACT SITUATION 1 On March 15, 2020, Hannah’s parents took her to Mercia Hospital 2 in Auburnville, California. The doctors said she had symptoms of Covid- 3 19, but they were unable to test her so they sent her home with 4 instructions to self-quarantine. She was diagnosed with an acute upper 5 respiratory infection. A few days later, Hannah’s symptoms became 6 more serious.
    [Show full text]
  • Willms & Shier Environmental Law Moot Court Competition 2013
    1 WILLMS & SHIER ENVIRONMENTAL LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2013 S.E.M.C.C. File Number: 03-09-2013 IN THE SUPREME ENVIRONMENTAL MOOT COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM THE ONTARIO COURT OF APPEAL) B E T W E E N: ELLEN SMITH APPELLANT (Appellant) - and - INCO LTD. RESPONDENT (Respondent) FACTUM OF THE RESPONDENT INCO LTD. Pursuant to Rule 12 of the Willms & Shier Environmental Law Moot Official Competition Rules 2013 TEAM #02 2 TO: THE REGISTRAR OF THE SUPREME ENVIRONMENTAL MOOT COURT OF CANADA AND TO: ALL REGISTERED TEAMS i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. PART I -- OVERVIEW AND STATEMENT OF FACTS ............................................................ 1 A. Overview of the Respondent’s Position .............................................................................. 1 B. Respondent’s Position with Respect to the Appellant’s Statement of the Facts ................. 2 PART II -- THE RESPONDENT’S POSITION WITH RESPECT TO THE APPELLANT’S QUESTIONS .................................................................................................................................. 2 PART III -- ARGUMENT .............................................................................................................. 2 A. Material Physical Damage to the Appellant’s Land Has Not Been Established ................ 2 (i) Physical Damage Must be Material, Actual and Readily Ascertainable .................... 3 (ii) The Requirement of Actual Damage Has Not Been Met ........................................... 3 (iii) A Loss in Property Value Does Not in
    [Show full text]